Jeffers v. Screen Extras Guild
Decision Date | 05 November 1951 |
Citation | 107 Cal.App.2d 253,237 P.2d 51 |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Parties | JEFFERS v. SCREEN EXTRAS GUILD, Inc., et al. Civ. 18352. |
Perry Bertram, Los Angeles, for appellant.
Gilbert, Nissen & Irvin, Robert W. Gilbert, Los Angeles, for respondents.
Demurrer was sustained to plaintiff's section amended complaint for libel, with leave to amend. Failing to file another amended complaint in time, upon motion of defendants, an order was made dismissing the action under the provisions of Subdivision 3 of Section 581 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Plaintiff appeals from the order dismissing the action; from the order sustaining the demurrer; and from an order subsequently made, denying his motion under Code of Civil Procedure, section 473 to vacate and set aside the order of dismissal.
Some considerable portion of the briefs has been devoted to the two grounds of appeal last stated. These may be summarily disposed of by stating: First, that an order sustaining or overruling a demurrer, without further action by the court, is not appealable. Harmon v. De Turk, 176 Cal. 758, 169 P. 680; Wood, Curtis & Co. v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co., 152 Cal. 344, 92 P. 868. Secondly, while the order denying relief under Code of Civil Procedure, Section 473 is appealable, Phelan v. Superior Court, 35 Cal.2d 363, 217 P.2d 951, it is not necessary to pass upon it because the appeal from the order of dismissal must be sustained.
This Court is required to determine whether, as a matter of law, the complaint states a cause of action. The order of dismissal entered on the minutes of the court was a final judgment from which an appeal could be taken. Colby v. Pierce, 15 Cal.App.2d 723, 59 P.2d 1046. And, failing to amend the complaint, plaintiff in effect refused to amend. Saddlemire v. Stockton Savings & Loan Soc., 144 Cal. 650, 79 P. 381; Huffaker v. Decker, 77 Cal.App.2d 383, 175 P.2d 254; Litch v. Kerns, 8 Cal.App. 747, 97 P. 897; 21 Cal.Jur. 125.
The complaint alleges that plaintiff was libeled by statements in a publication of defendants' called 'News Letters to Members.'
Asserted libelous statements in the article are as follows:
challenge and will continue to expose him for what he is--a would-be dictator who seeks to further his own selfish ambitions at the expense of the extra players; a discredited leader of a discredited union which permitted open shop for extra players and started to flood the extras' ranks with non-union newcomers. That is Jeffers.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Maidman v. Jewish Publications, Inc.
...Schomberg v. Walker, 132 Cal. 224, 64 P. 290; MacLeod v. Tribune Publishing Co., 52 Cal.2d 536, 343 P.2d 36; Jeffers v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., 107 Cal.App.2d 253, 237 P.2d 51; Dethlefsen v. Stull, 86 Cal.App.2d 499, 195 P.2d The editorial in question could not have any effect other than......
-
Otworth v. Southern Pac. Transportation Co.
...sustaining a demurrer with leave to amend is not a final judgment and therefore not itself appealable. (Jeffers v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc. (1951) 107 Cal.App.2d 253, 254, 237 P.2d 51.) If a plaintiff fails or refuses to amend the complaint, the court will enter a judgment of dismissal fro......
-
Lagiss v. Contra Costa County
...221, 223, 20 Cal.Rptr. 598; Carley v. City of Santa Rosa, 154 Cal.App.2d 214, 214-215, 315 P.2d 905; Jeffers v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., 107 Cal.App.2d 253, 254, 237 P.2d 51.) 4 Art. XI, § 18, in part provides: 'No county, city, town, township, board of education, or school district, shal......
-
Timperley v. Chase Collection Service
...the demurrer. The order sustaining the demurrer is a preliminary order that is not separately appealable. (Jeffers v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., 107 Cal.App.2d 253, 254, 237 P.2d 51.) Respondents contend at the outset that the sufficiency of the complaint is not before us on this appeal and......